Figure 2: Phenotypic analysis of the isolated cells based on different purifying methods.(A-C): Representative micrographs of the isolated cells based on the MACS (A), Shaking (J), and Shaking + MACS (C) purifying methods that were stained (half an hour after plating) for β III-tubulin, GFAP and DAPI. (D-E): The percentage of β III-tubulin IR (D) and GFAP IR (E) cells was quantified for each of the isolated populations. While the percentage of β III-tubulin IR cells did not significantly change using different strategies, compared to the MACS method, both the Shaking and the Shaking + MACS methods significantly resulted in less GFAP IR astrocytes in the isolated cell population (mean ± SEM; n=3-5 independent experiments; * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.0001, one-way ANOVA). (F): Representative micrographs of the isolated cells based on Shaking purifying method that were stained (half an hour after plating) for PSA-NCAM and DAPI. Scale bars = 50 μm. Abbreviations: GFAP= Glial fibrillary acidic protein, IR= Immunoreactive, DAPI= 4’,6-Diamidino-2-Phenylindole, PSA-NCAM = Polysialylated neuronal cell adhesion molecule, ANOVA= analysis of variances.